blender_execute_python

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Adds context beyond the annotations by stating 'DESTRUCTIVE: arbitrary code can modify or delete anything in the scene' and explaining that `bpy` is pre-imported and data is returned via a `result` variable. These details go beyond the destructiveHint annotation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with sections for purpose, usage, warning, args, returns, and example. It is concise, front-loaded, and every sentence contributes value without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity as an arbitrary code execution escape hatch, the description covers execution context, return protocol, destructive warning, limits, and an example. This is sufficient for correct selection and invocation, especially with the sibling list and output schema as scaffolding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema describes the `code` parameter, but the tool description supplements it with the `result` return convention, the 20,000 character limit, and a concrete example. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Execute arbitrary Python code inside Blender' with 'escape hatch for advanced ops', establishing a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by framing it as a fallback for when dedicated tools do not apply.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says 'Use this only when no dedicated tool fits', providing direct when-to-use guidance and implicitly naming alternatives. The example further clarifies appropriate usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.